See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/43154634

Analysis of offshore jacket platform

Article · January 2010

Source: OAI

CITATIONS READS
2 3,263

4 authors, including:

Harish Narayana S. Mandal

National Institute of Technology Goa National Institute of Oceanography
22 PUBLICATIONS   56 CITATIONS    87 PUBLICATIONS   1,540 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Subba Rao
National Institute of Technology Karnataka
105 PUBLICATIONS   439 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

floating pipe breakwater View project

ProceedingsoftheSixthInternationalConferenceon AsianandPacificCoasts(APAC2011) INFLUENCEOFWAVEANDSTRUCTUREPARAMETERSON

TRANMISSIONCHARACTERISTICSOFHIMMFPIPE BREAKWATERWITHFIVELAYERS View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Harish Narayana on 17 April 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Proceedings of SWaRM

ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE JACKET PLATFORM

Harish N 1, Sukomal Mandal 2, Shanthala B 3, Subba Rao 4
1- PG student,2- Dy Director, NIO, Goa,3 – Research scholar,4- Professor
National Institute of Technology Karnataka Surathkal-575025
Email:[email protected]
ABSTRACT
The estimation of response parameters plays an important role in the design of
offshore structure. The periodic inspection and monitoring of offshore platforms for
certification needs the study of the responses of structures owing to wave and wind
forces. The complex dynamic behavior of the platform to the environmental loads makes
it difficult to calculate exactly the dynamic responses. The present need of the industry is
to have a time saving and accurate calculation methods, which can be in good agreement
with the actual response parameters.
Pierson-Moskowitz (P-M) spectrum is used for the calculating wave height and
wave period for different wind speed. For a wind speed of 41.67 m/s, a significant wave
height 14.86 m and wave period 21.66 sec is considered for the present investigation. The
responses of the structure to the varying wave and wind forces at different water depth
are analyzed using well defined dynamic analysis method. The industry standard
StruCAD software package developed specially for offshore structural analysis is used to
obtain platform displacement response under varying external loadings. In the present
analysis, dynamic behavior of the structure and deflection of the platform is studied for
individual and combined wind and wave forces.

INTRODUCTION
Offshore oil reserves are explored and exploited using offshore structures. Hence
the main driving force behind this technology of installation of offshore platform has
come from oil industry and need for exploration of the extensive hydrocarbons reserve
existing in the offshore regions. Its use is however not limited solely to the industry, but
an important application exists for military and navigational purpose also. The total
number of offshore platform in various bays, gulf and oceans of the world is increasing
year by year, most of which are of fixed type.
There are more than 9000 offshore oil and gas installations around the world,
these offshore installations are used for drilling, preparing water or gas for injection into
the reservoir for processing oil and gas, cleaning the produced water for disposal into the
sea and accommodating the staff. Recently, many researchers have worked on the control
of large civil structures [Abdel-Rohman, 1996; Leipholz and Abdel-Rohman, 1986;
Terro et al, 1999; Yamamoto et al, 1991; Gobrick and Legge, 1996; Kawano, 1993]. This
is the case because these structures are dynamically vulnerable to seismic excitations and
excessive random shocks. In the case of offshore structures exposed to wave forces,
several researchers have developed and implemented passive and/or active control
systems to ensure the safety of the structures.
Modern offshore platforms have evolved into flexible constructions with water
depths exceeding 300 m (1000 feet) and sophisticated superstructures [Abdel-Rohman,
1996]. Self-excited nonlinear hydrodynamic forces are induced due to the flexibility of
such structures, and their large deformations cause a highly nonlinear response
[Chakrabati, 1987]. Possible solutions to ensure safety include increasing the stiffness of
 Proceedings of SWaRM

the structure [Rajagopalan, 1993], thus moving the natural frequencies away from
resonance. This is usually performed by increasing the cross-sectional area of individual
elements and/or adding bracing members to the structure. However, the huge costs
inflicted by the latter passive approach render active control methods a more attractive
alternative [Leipholz and Abdel-Rohman, 1986].
Chakrabati (2005) describes a historical development of offshore structures, some
studies on loads, responses and design of fixed offshore platforms.
The wave force on slender tubular member is described as the summation of
orbital velocity- dependent drag force and orbital acceleration-dependent inertial force.
Though this methodology, originally proposed for a vertical circular cylinder resting on
the sea bed and piercing the sea surface by Morison et al. (1950), is widely used for the
calculation of wave forces on tubular members, uncertainty still prevails in assigning the
values for the hydrodynamic coefficients of drag, CD , and inertia CM,.
The present paper deals with the dynamic behavior of the jacket platform and
analysis the deflection characteristics of the structure.

LOADS ON THE STRUCTURE

For the present analysis loads considered are
a) Dead and Live load
b) Wind force
c) Wave force
Dead and live load
Dead loads include all fixed items in the platform deck, jacket, flare and bridge
structures. Live loads are defined as movable loads and will be temporary in nature. Total
load considered for the analysis is 20,000 tonnes.
Wind force
American Petroleum Institute (API RP 2A) recommends the following formula to
calculate wind force on offshore structures,
F = 0.5 ρ Cs A U2 (1)
Where,
F =Wind force in KN,
U = sustained wind velocity in m/Sec
CS = Shape coefficient,
A = Projected area of object, m2
For the present analysis wind force considered is 41.67 m/Sec.
Calculation of wave height and wave period
The first systematic and reliable way of establishing an ocean wave spectrum is
carried out by Pierson and Moskowitz [Pierson and Moskowitz 1964] and is widely
accepted for the waves of fully developed sea. The Pierson-Moskowitz spectrum is
defined as:
⎛ −B ⎞
⎛ A ⎞ ⎜ 4⎟
S (ω ) = ⎜ 5 ⎟ * e ⎝ ω ⎠ (2)
⎝ω ⎠
4
⎛g⎞
Where, A= 0.0082g2 , B = 0.74 ⎜ ⎟ , ω= 2πf
⎝u⎠
u= wind speed in m/s, g= gravitational acceleration in m/s2 , f = frequency in Hz
 Proceedings of SWaRM

The statistical parameters were evaluated using the spectral moments as follows:
Significant wave height Hs=4 m0
m0
Zero crossing wave period, Tz=
m2
Where, mn= fn*S (f) df

From P-M spectrum for a wind speed of 41.67 m/sec the estimated significant wave
height, 14.86 m and wave period, 21.66 sec are considered for the analysis.

Wave force
The determination of the forces exerted by waves on structure is very complex
task. Waves can be represented analytically using different theories. There are three basic
forms of waves: (1) sinusoidal waves, (2) cnoidal waves, (3) solitary waves. To calculate
wave forces, one must first select a proper wave theory to compute the water particle
velocities and acceleration. Generally sinusoidal wave theory is suitable for deep water
waves. In the present study simple sinusoidal wave theory (Airy wave theory) is used.
The ratio of horizontal dimension (D) to wave length (L) is smaller than 0.05 hence we
can calculate the wave load using Morrison’s Formula.

Wave load per unit length is

πD 2 du
F = 0.5ρC D D u (u ) + ρC M (3)
4 dt
Where,
CM and CD are the hydrodynamic inertia and drag coefficients,
ρ = Water density, D = Pile diameter, u = Water velocity
du
= water acceleration
dt
The expression for the horizontal components of the velocity and acceleration of water
are:
πH cosh k ( Z + d )
u= cos( kx − σt ) (4)
T sinh kd
du π 2 cosh k ( Z + d )
= −2 2 H sin( kx − σt ) (5)
dt T sinh kd

Where, x=0; σt=θ

d=depth of water; H = wave height; T = wave period;
Z= distance of particle from free surface.

STRUCTURAL MODEL
In the present study a fixed platform made up of steel structure is used for
analysis. Total height of the structure is 220 m. Bottom dimension is 110 m X 70 m and
at 200 m height dimension is 50 m X 30 m. At the top of the deck the dimension is 60 m
X 40 m. All vertical legs are 1.5 m in diameter and the wall thickness is 0.2 m. The
diagonal bracings are 1.25 m diameter and the wall thickness is 0.15 m and horizontal
 Proceedings of SWaRM

bracings are 1.1m diameter and 0.05 m wall thickness. The computer 3D model of the
structure is shown in Fig 1. As per requirement of inputs to StruCAD, the structural
members and nodes are defined. A total of 74 nodes and 248 structural members are
considered for the proposed Jacket structure.

Fig.1. Computer 3-D Model of the Jacket Structure

Dynamic response analysis using StruCAD

The basic dynamic equation for forced vibration is given by
m&x& + cx& + kx = F (t ) (6)
Where,
m is the mass matrix (lumped or consistent),
c is a viscous damping matrix (which is normally selected to approximate energy
dissipation in the real structure),
k is the stiffness matrix for the system of structural elements,
x , x& and &x& are the absolute node displacements, velocities and accelerations, respectively.
F(t) is external loading.
In Strucad, the structure is subjected to a single repeatable wave and steady state
response is calculated using Fourier series. The basic assumption behind this approach is
that the same repeatable wave is stained long enough to establish a steady state response.
The theoretical approach is as follows: (StruCAD*3D, Zentech Inc. Huston)
A full cycle of wave is applied to the structure. The hydrodynamic forces are
calculated using Morison’s equation, and saved for each time step and each member. This
distributed member forces are then calculated to equivalent joints loads using static
equilibrium.
For each wave time step, the joint load vector created above is multiplied by the
mode shape deflections to calculate the generalized forces for each mode.
Working with a mode at a time, and considering the fact that the generalized
forces calculated for different time steps represent a periodic function, a Fourier
transformation can be applied to generate a series of sinusoidal forcing functions with
 Proceedings of SWaRM

different frequencies and amplitude, which would represent the same periodic function if
they are superimposed at any time during the wave period.
Considering the fact that each structural mode represents a single degree of
freedom system with appropriate stiffness, mass, and damping properties, the static state
response of each mode due to any of the sinusoidal Fourier components can be easily
calculated. The total response of each can be obtained by linear superposition of response
due to each Fourier component.
The response calculated above for each individual mode can be linearly summed
to derive the overall response of the structure.
After completion of the process, the StruCAD*3D program will report the time
history of the mud line forces and the moment for both modal static and the modal
dynamic cases. The comparison between the results of these two reports can be used to
estimate the dynamic amplification.

RESULT AND DISCUSSION

The dynamic analysis of the Jacket platform is carried out for 200 m water depth
with different loading conditions. The physical description of the selected jacket offshore
platform is shown in Fig 1. The deck weight is assumed to be 20,000 tonnes and is
equally distributed on the top of the deck.
In this study dynamic behavior of the platform and deflection of jacket platform at
water level are considered. To start from the scratch, tower at water depth of 200 m is
analyzed for individual load cases. The deck displacements to the individual load cases
and combined load cases are studied.

Wave Response Analysis of the Structure

The dynamic analysis of Jacket platform is carried out for the wave and wind
forces derived from P-M spectrum. To illustrate the dynamic behavior of the structure a
particular wave response analysis result is described below.
Structure at 200 m water depth is subjected to a wave height 14.86 m with wave
period of 21.66 Sec. To illustrate the dynamic response of the platform to wave loading,
the time history plots of the generalized forces and generalized displacements for the first
four modes are given in Fig.2. The first and the fourth mode and the second and third
modes are found to be similar magnitude but in opposite direction. From Fig 2 we
observe that the maximum force of 236.08 kN and maximum displacement of 15.14 cm
has occurred in mode shape number 2 at time 20.577 sec. Also from Fig 2 we notice that
the structure exhibits the sinusoidal behavior. The time histories of the generalized
velocity are shown in Fig 3. For Mode-ІІ case, time history of estimated generalized
force, velocity and displacement are shown in Fig-4. It is observed that the generalized
forces and generalized displacements have similar variation.
The above results of the dynamic analysis are carried out in order to understand the
response nature of platform to the wave forces.
 Proceedings of SWaRM

300 20
G e n e r a liz e d F o r c e (K N ) 200 15
10

D isp la cem en t (cm )

100
MODE 1 5 MODE 1
0 MODE 2
MODE 2
0
MODE 3 MODE 3
-100
MODE 4 -5 MODE 4
-200 -10

-300 -15

-400
-20
0 5 10 15 20 25 0 5 10 15 20 25

TIME (Sec) Time (Sec)

Fig.2. Time History of Generalized Force and Generalized Displacement at

Different Mode

4
Velocity (cm/Sec)

2
MODE 1
MODE 2
0
MODE 3
MODE 4
-2

-4

-6
0 5 10 15 20 25
Time (Sec)

Fig.3 .Time History of Generalized Velocity

Force Velocity Displacement

Displacement (cm)

300 6
16

200 12
4
8
100 2
4
Force (kN)

0 0
Velocity (cm/Sec)

-4
-100 -2
-8
-200 -4
-12
-16
-300 -6
0 5 10 15 20 25
Time (Sec)

Fig.4. Time history of generalized force, velocity and displacement

 Proceedings of SWaRM

Displacement of the Structure

Even though time series deflection of the platform were estimated using
StruCAD, only maximum deflection to each wave and wind forces are extracted. The
StruCAD analysis was conducted for a 200 m water depth to get wave response
parameter for the maximum wind and wave forces that are taken from the P-M spectrum.
The deflection responses to the wind and wave force are shown in Fig 5. It should be
noted that the response considered are deflection in global Y-direction. The estimated
deflection due to combined wind and wave forces are shown in Fig 6. As mentioned
earlier deflection response in the global Y-direction extracted from the analysis result.
From Figs. 5 and 6 we observe that the platform deflections are proportional to the wind
and wave loadings. The maximum platform deflection is 2.39cm at the top side of the
deck for a wave height of 14.86 m and wind speed of 41.67 m/Sec.
50 50

0 0
W a ter D ep th (m )

Water Depth (m)

-50 -50
Platform Platform
-100 Deflection due to -100 Deflection due to
Wind force Wave force
-150 -150

-200 -200

-250 -250
0 25 50 75 100 0 25 50 75 100

Deflection (mm)
Deflection (mm)

Fig.5. Jacket Platform deflection for individual Wind & Wave Forces
50

0
Water Depth (m)

-50
Platform Deflection due
-100 to combined Wind &
Wave forces
-150

-200

-250
0 25 50 75 100

Deflection (mm)

Fig. 6.Jacket Platform deflection for combined Wind and Wave Force

CONCLUSIONS
In the present analysis, deflection of the platform is studied for individual and
combined wind and wave forces. It is done for the maximum wind and wave forces only
on the positive Y direction. It is noted that the maximum deflection is 2.39 cm due to
combined wind and wave forces. Dynamic analysis of the structure is studied to know the
dynamic behavior of the structure. From the dynamic analysis we noted that the
maximum displacement occurred in mode shape number 2.
 Proceedings of SWaRM

REFERENCES

1. Abdel-Rohman, M., ‘Structural control of a steel jacket platform’, Structural and

Engineering Mechanics 4(2), 1996, 125–138.
2. Chakrabarti, S K., Hydrodynamics of Offshore Structures, Springer, Berlin, 1987.
3. Chakrabarti, S K., Handbook of Offshore Engineering, Elsevier, Oxford, UK, 2005.
4. Gobrick, R. and Legge, N., ‘Hibernia: The next generation of offshore platform control
systems’, IEEE Industry Applications Magazine 2(3), 1996, 6–14.
5. Kawano, K., ‘Active control effects on dynamic response of offshore structure’, in
Proceedings of 3rd ISOPE, Singapore, 1993, pp. 498–504.
6. Leipholz, H. H. and Abdel-Rohman, M., Control of Structures, Martinus Nijhoff
Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 1986.
7. Morrison, J.R., O’Brien, M.P, Johnson, J.W., Schaaf, S.A. The Force Exerted by
Surface Waves on Piles. Petroleum Transaction. Vol. (189), 1950, 149-157.
8. Pierson,W.J, and Moskowitz ,L. A proposed spectrum forms for fully developed wind
sea based on the similarity theory of S.A Kitaigorodskii, journal of geophysical
research , 1964, 69, 5181-5190
9. Rajagopalan, K., ‘Reliability of offshore jackets using point estimation’, in
Proceedings of the 3rd ISOPE, Singapore, 1993, pp. 606–612.
10. Terro,M. J., Mahmoud, M. S., and Abdel-Rohman, M., ‘Multi-loop feedback control
of offshore steel jacket platforms’, Computers & Structures 70, 1999, 185–202.
11.Yamamoto, I., Terada, Y., and Yokokura, K., ‘An application of a position keeping
control system to floating offshore platform’, in Proceedings of the International
Conference on Industrial Electronics, Control and Instrumentation, IECON’91,
Kobe, Japan, 1991, pp. 1867–1872.
12. StruCAD*3D, Zentech Inc. Huston, USA

View publication stats